Implantable Tissue Scaffold

ABSTRACT

A biodegradable scaffold for wound closure including a central rod and two spaced plates. The central rod may have an engagement block on top for stabilizing a implanting tool. The two spaced plates include an upper plate connected to the central rod and a lower plate connected to the central rod. Each of the upper and lower plates may include perforations which may be useful for detachably connecting an implanting tool and which encourage growth of the tissue. The biodegradable scaffold allows tension free anatomical alignment of tissue within the plates and facilitate wound healing. The upper and lower plate may have a helical, in which each plate may extend around the central rod greater than 360 degrees. The helical shape creates a camber feature that serves to draw or pull tissue around the wound defect into the scaffold during the course when deploying the scaffold.

RELATED APPLICATION

This Application claims priority from U.S. Provisional Patent Application 62/778,634, entitled Implantable Tissue Scaffold, filed Dec. 12, 2018.

FEDERAL GRANTS

This invention was made with government support under SBIR Grant Number 1R43HD086896-01A1 NICHD awarded by the Small Business Administration. The government may have certain rights to the invention.

BACKGROUND Technical Field

The present invention generally relates to a wound closure device and more specifically to a wound closure device to repair a defect left during laparoscopic (minimally invasive) surgery.

Laparoscopic surgery was introduced as an alternative to open surgical methods. Also referred to as minimally invasive surgery, the technique allows for small incision access to the intra-abdominal cavity, or other internal body cavities. The approach utilizes specialized equipment such as robotics for the purposes of inflating the abdominal cavity with gas, deploying and exchanging instruments during the operation, and real time imaging with a videoscopic camera.

A laparoscopic trocar is a surgical device used for laparoscopic procedures to pierce and access the wall of an anatomical cavity, thereby forming a passageway providing communication with the inside of the cavity. Other medical instruments such as videoscopes and operating instruments can thereafter be inserted through the passageway to perform various medical procedures within the anatomical cavity. The general background is also discussed in U.S. Pat. No. 9,615,817 to Bippart et al. which is hereby incorporated by reference for all purposes herein.

When the procedures are over, the laparoscopic trocar is removed, leavinga residual defect in the fascia-peritoneal layer. Laparoscopic trocars are typically 5-15 mm in diameter. There is risk of herniation increases as the trocar size increases, and it is generally recommended that any port size larger than 5 mm should be closed because of the risk of hernias. The residual facia peritoneal layer defect is located deep in the abdominal wall, making it difficult to view and for the surgeon to repair.

Trocar site herniation is a recognized complication of laparoscopic surgery. Omental, and sometimes intestinal, herniation with incarceration and obstruction has been documented in recent surgical literature, occurring at any trocar insertion site larger than 5 mm that was not sutured at operation. The necessity to perform fascial closure of any trocar insertion site larger than 5 mm has now been established and is routinely practiced worldwide.

However, the closure of such a trocar site fascial defect using the conventional suturing technique is often technically difficult, frustrating, unreliably successful, and even sometimes dangerous due to the limited size of skin incision, the thickness of the subcutaneous fatty layer, and necessity of blind manipulation. Moreover, the suturing that involves placement of deep blind sutures after the abdomen has been decompressed is a dangerous manipulation that surgeons prefer to avoid.

A number of techniques and instruments have been proposed to facilitate a safe and secure closure of the fascial defect through the tiny skin opening. Many of these repairs include passing in any way a suture from one side of the trocar wound to the other, and its ligation. For this purpose either a curved needle or a variety of straight needles through which sutures are passed have been used. Problems arise as both sides of the defect may not be sutured. Also, in overweight and obese patients with thick abdominal walls, reliable fascia closure is very difficult to achieve. This results in a delayed hernia formation such as an incarcerated or symptomatic hernia.

The literature shows as much as a 6% overall hernia complication rate, resulting in reoperation, rehospitalization, and extended disability. In the worst case this results in the need for an emergent repair, resulting in rehospitalization.

Suturing techniques require positioning of the camera and grasping, visualization of the needles during their entrance into the peritoneal cavity, feeding of the graspers or suture passers with the suture loop, all of which are repeated once or twice for every trocar defect. Any of these suturing techniques are not only time and effort consuming, even in the best of hands. As more defects at various sites in the abdominal wall are to be closed after advanced laparoscopic operations, the suturing techniques have become more complicated and tedious.

Techniques using instruments such as suture passers work by adding a catch onto the end of a needle assembly. These guide positioning of the suture fixed point beyond the edges of the trocar defect and assure primary closure when direct visualization is limited from the outside. Intracorporeal laparoscopic closure techniques employ suture passers with a modified clasp or spacers at the end of the needle assembly. These guide positioning of the suture at a fixed point beyond the edge of the trocar defect and assure primary closure when direct visualization is limited from the outside and conventional suturing is not possible.

Moreover, a series of manipulations is needed to complete a single suturing. The conventional suturing technique involves much traumatic manipulation including pushing, pulling and retraction of the wound, and insertion and extraction of needles. Most of the time the needle is passed twice, and sometimes more. As manipulation in the wound increases, the inflammation and risk of ensuing infection rise considerably. The edema and the collection of seroma and hematoma at the wound further cause dehiscence and hernia formation on a long-term basis.

Excessive traumatic manipulation and suturing with heavy sutures opposethe “minimal damage” basis of laparoscopic surgery. The patients are subject to pain and complications at their trocar sites in the postoperative period.

Tedious intra-corporeal suturing techniques can be used to dose trocar port defects under direct vision from within the abdominal cavity, but this is rarely done. Instead, most trocar ports are dosed from the outside, with the abdominal wall in a flattenedconfiguration.

As a result, the residual defect within the fascial layer is poorly visualized by the surgeon. No matter which suturing technique or needle is used, it is not possible to eliminate the trocar site hernias completely. As described in Malazgirt (US Patent Application, pub #20060015142 published Jan. 19, 2006), the current incidence is reportedly between 0.77-3%.

As complex laparoscopic surgery becomes more common, the incidence of this complication increases. The reported rates of hernia show that there is not yet any superior method in the safe closure of the trocar fascial defect.

U.S. Pat. No. 6,120,539 issued Sep. 19, 2000 proposed a prosthetic repair fabric constructed from a combination of non-absorbable tissue-infiltratable fabric which faces the anterior surface of the fascia and an adhesion-resistant barrier which faces outward from the fascia. This prosthetic requires the use of sutures to hold it in place.

U.S. Pat. No. 5,366,460, issued Nov. 22, 1994 proposed the use of a non- biodegradable fabric-coated loop inserted through the defect into the fascia wall, pressing against the posterior fascia wall from the intra-abdominal pressure.

U.S. Pat. No. 6,241,768, issued Jun. 5, 2001 proposed a prosthetic device made of a biocompatible non-biodegradable mesh, which sits across the fascia defect using the abdominal pressure to hold it in place.

US Published Patent Application 2003/0181988 proposed a plug made of biocompatible non-biodegradable material which covers the anterior side of the fascia, the defect, as well as the posterior side of the fascia.

US Published Patent Application 2006/0015142 proposed a plug/mesh non-biodegradable combination for repair of large trocar wounds. It is stated that it requires at least a “clean flat area around with a radius of 2.5 cm”, and requires staples to hold it in place.

Ford and Torres (Pat Pub# 20060282105) proposed a patch with a tether or strap, all made of non-biodegradable biocompatible material placed against the anterior wall of the fascia defect.

All of the above references are hereby incorporated by reference as if fully set out herein.

SUMMARY

One embodiment of the invention is an implantable tissue scaffold for wound closure which includes a central rod, an upper plate angularly positioned on the central rod; and a lower plate that is also angularly positioned on central rod. The spacing on the central rod of the upper and lower plate is determined by the thickness of the defect caused by the laproscopic tocar, and may vary. This allows the tissue scaffold to be positioned such that one plate is on a tissue surface on one side of the tunnel like defect, and the other plate is on the other side of the tunnel like tocar defect. One unique feature of the implantable tissue scaffold is that it is a single, unitary piece. This allows the tissue scaffold to be adaptable to 3-D printing, and simpler to manufacture as it has no moving parts. Another unique feature is that it is made of a biodegradable material, which will biodegrade once placed within 3-5 months.

The tissue scaffold may have a number of configurations. For example, the upper and lower plates may be in part essentially perpendicular to the central rod. The upper and lower plates may be divided into fractional sections, such as quadrants, which are circumferentially positioned about the central rod. One or more of the upper and lower plate may camber helically. Such a shape aids the implantable tissue scaffold in seating on either side of the trocar defect. The surface of the plates may include features to both promote tissue growth through the tissue scaffold and to aid in gripping the device by an implanting or placement tool. For example, the upper and lower plates may include perforations, such as an inner and outer row of perforations through the upper and lower plates. These perforations promote through growth and allow a tool, such as a gripping tool, to position/implant the implantable tissue scaffold.

Such perforations on the upper and lower plates may be in multiple rows. These perforations reduce the material required to manufacture the device, provides a feature to grip onto the device by a tool, and promotes tissue through growth.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 shows a first side view of an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 2 shows a second side view of an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 3 shows a third side view of an embodiment of the invention, FIGS. 1-3 showing various views about the circumference of an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 4 shows a top view an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 5 shows a side perspective view of an embodiment of the invention showing the upper sides of the upper and lower plates.

FIG. 6 shows a side perspective view of an embodiment of the invention showing the lower sides of the upper and lower plates.

FIG. 7 shows a bottom view of an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 8 shows a diagram of one or more embodiments of the device inserted into a wound.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Specific embodiments and examples are illustrated in the figures and described in the detailed description. However, it is envisioned that the disclosed tissue scaffold may be put into practice using any of a number of elements, and could be made using a variety of methods, whether presently known or not. The present disclosure should in no way be limited to the exemplary implementations and techniques illustrated in the drawings and described below. In addition, elements, features and designs illustrated in the drawings are not necessarily drawn to scale.

In one or more embodiments, as shown in FIG. 1, the device includes a central rod 102, an engagement block attached to the one end of the central rod 104, an upper plate 106, and a lower plate 108 essentially perpendicular to the central rod 104. The plates are at least in part essentially parallel to each other with enough space between to allow the tissue to seat without direct compression. This spacing is designed for the average tissue thickness at common sites of trocar insertion. In initial tests it has been found that even when the implantable tissue scaffold is too small to seat at the outer and inner peripheral edges of a trocar defect, the device still has clinical benefit. For example, in obese patients, the tissue thickness may be variable, and the trocar insertion may leave a larger defect. In such instances it has been found that the implantable tissue scaffold may position within a passageway of the defect and results in tissue growth prior to device biodegradation.

In one embodiment, the upper and lower plates are designed in a screw-like manner, such that opposing ends of the upper plate 106 are attached to the engagement block 104 on the central rod 102, and that the upper end of the upper plate 106 aligns with the top side of the engagement block 104, and the lower end of the upper plate 106 aligns with the bottom side of the engagement block 104. In this embodiment, the base element of each plate is a three-quarter circle where the first and second quadrants are essentially perpendicular to the engagement block 104, and the third quadrant cambers helically. The corner of the first quadrant is rounded to avoid any sharp edges, while the edge of the third quadrant has a semi-circular attachment which attaches on one side to the outside of the inner edge and on the inside to where the edge meets the central rod 102. The quadrant that is helical on the upper plate 106 is the opposite of the quadrant of the lower plate 108 supporting defect edges of tissue alignment where the scaffold is encouraged to stay near the wound without injuring the tissue.

The term scaffold as used here is to define the surfaces of the upper plate and lower plate which contact the tissue, into which the tissue will grow as the plates disintegrate. In one embodiment, the upper and lower plates have perforations which aid in this process.

In other embodiments, the first and third quadrants of each of the upper plate 106 and lower plate 108 are perpendicular to the central rod 102, while the middle quadrant is helical in the same direction. However instead of a single 90-degree arc, the third quadrant provides a complete loop as well, about 5 quadrants or 450 degrees, which provides more of a grabbing effect on the tissue between the two plates, further encouraging the scaffold to stay near the wound. The term quadrants are illustrative of a division of the plates into fractional sections. The plates are circumferential about the central rod 102. These plates may be something less than 360 degrees about the central rod, make a single 360degree covering, or include 5 quadrants and be about 450 degrees to magnify the grabbing effect of the device.

FIG. 2 shows a side view of the device showing the lower end 112 of the lower plate 108 and the lower end 114 of the upper plate 106. This view shows the lower base perforations 110 which are present on the lower plate. In one or more embodiments, there are one or more perforations present in each quadrant of the plate. The lower base perforations 110 both encourage growth into the scaffold and reduce the weight of the device. In addition, the perforations could be a feature to allow a tool to grip onto the implantable tissue scaffold and position the device. Although upper plate 106 and lower plate 108 are shown having essentially flat surfaces, it is contemplated that textured surfaces could be used to aid in the stable positioning of the device. In this illustrated embodiment, the perforations are elliptical, however any variety of shapes are possible. These perforations shown pass through the entire plate and are uniform in diameter. It is also contemplated that the pore shapes could taper, be more circular or angular or have other shapes or designs. The illustration shows the perforations in both lower and upper plate present disposed in one set of perforations closer to the central rod and one set peripherally outward.

FIG. 3 shows a side view of an embodiment looking at a different side view of the device, such that the lower end 114 of the upper plate 106 and the lower end 112 of the lower plate 108 are on the opposite side of that shown in FIG. 2.

FIG. 4 shows a top view of an embodiment of FIGS. 1-3, showing the engagement block 104 connected to the upper plate 106, the lower end of the upper plate 114 and the upper plate perforations 116. The upper base perforations 116 serve both to encourage growth as well as to provide a place for the instrument placing the device into the wound to hold and stabilize it. As shown, upper base perforations 116 are larger than the perforations of lower plate 108, and instead of an elliptical shape has a flat surface closest to the central rod 102, two essentially perpendicular side walls and a curved outer wall at the radial greater distance from central rod 102. These larger perforations with flat surfaces are more suited to grasping by a positioning tool during implantation of the implantable tissue scaffold.

FIG. 5 shows a side perspective view of an embodiment, looking down at the top of the device at an approximate 45-degree angle.

FIG. 6 shows an upward view of an embodiment, looking up at the bottom of the device a tan approximate 45-degree angle.

FIG. 7 shows a bottom view of an embodiment.

FIG. 8 shows an embodiment of the device in place, inserted into the wound of the tissue 116. The device acts to hold the tissue in place around the wound 118 with minimal harm to the tissue. The central rod 102 may be between 20 and 95% of the width of the wound 118, with a range of 25-50% of the width of wound 118 expected to be more preferred. The width of the tissue scaffold is scaled to the wound width, with the plates extending over the edges of the wound such that at least 10% of the width of the upper and lower plate is seated against the upper and lower edge of wound 118, with an 11% to 25% radial overlap considered to provide greater stability and a 50% overlap providing maximal stability and chance for tissue through growth while still allowing the central rod to fit through wound opening during insertion of the insertable tissue scaffold. The general width of the device will be matched to the size of the trocar used in the minimally invasive procedure. A device having a width of between 5 and 15 mm would be used on most defects. Scaffolds of variable sizes may be used to repair tissue defects of variable sizes. Larger diameter tissue scaffolds may be required to repair eccentric shaped abdominal defects. It is envisioned that in clinical use, the defect could be measured and the scaffold manufactured (e.g. by 3D printing) on demand proximate to an operating room to allow the tissue scaffold to be tailored to the defect being repaired. Alternatively, the tissue scaffold can be selected from a variety of manufactured sizes to accommodate defects of differing depth and widths. Given that trocars are in standard sizes, it is believed that standard sized tissue scaffolds could be utilized for the routine trocar defect sizes.

As illustrated in FIG. 8, in order to optimize tissue alignment and healing and to reduce the risk of hernia complications, the scaffold is designed to extend beyond the edges of the defect. This anchors the device and prevents extrusion of prolapse of the scaffold during the healing biodegradation period.

In one or more embodiments, the device is used as follows. An insertion device is detachably coupled from above the upper plate 114 by coupling with the upper base perforations 116, using the engagement block 104 to provide stability. After the trocar has been removed from the abdominal wall entry site, the joined insertion device and attached scaffold are placed in the trocar port site and positioned such that the lower plate 108 engages the peritoneal layer of the intra-abdominal cavity and/or the fascia muscle layer within the length of the tissue tunnel. The helical shape contains a camber feature that services to draw or pull tissue around the wound defect into the scaffold during the course of deploying the scaffold. At that point in time, the insertion tool can be detached from the scaffold and removed from the operative field. The implantable scaffold has engaged tissue between the upper plate 106 and lower plate 108, securing tissue in anatomical alignment while the trocar port has time to heal. The upper base perforations 116 and lower base perforations 110 are there to encourage the tissue ingrowth into the scaffold and facilitate healing of the trocar port defect.

As shown in the illustrated embodiments, the upper plate 106 and lower plate 108 have two quadrants that are essentially parallel to each other and are displaced from each other by a single plate thickness. A third quadrant is cambered to allow the upper and lower plates to have an essentially uniform thickness while one quadrant is one plate thickens further up or down the central rod 102. This is best shown visualized in FIG. 5. This cambered helical structure and curved edges of the plates provide a tactile feel fo the scaffold during implantation, aids in the proper seating of the device and provides useful haptic feedback and assurance that the tissue scaffold is securely engaged with the tissue.

General Composition of the Wound Closure Device

Materials specified for the wound closure device are specific for its intended application and use. The scope of materials that will satisfy the requirements of this application is unusually narrow. This is a direct consequence of the specificity and functional demands characteristic of the intended surgical application.

The intention for the wound closure device is to close and secure the trocar port defect in the fascia. This requires a known and finite healing interval of some three to five months. Its purpose fulfilled at the end of this period, making continued presence of the closure device a potential liability. Maurus and Kaeding (Maurus, P. B. and Kaeding, C. C., “Bioabsorbable Implant Material Review”, Oper. Tech. Sports Med 12, 158-160,2004) describe the advantages of a device that is biodegradable. This means that the materials will degrade or disintegrate, being absorbed in the surrounding local tissue environment after a definite, predictable, and desired period of time. One advantage of such materials over non-degradable or essentially stable materials is that after the interval for which they are applied (i.e. healing time) has elapsed, they are fully biodegraded and do not act as a residual foreign body. This is most significant as it minimizes risks associated with foreign body reaction, chronic inflammation and/or suture granuloma. Furthermore, the presence of the scaffold structure supports tension free anatomic alignment of the tissue defect and facilitates wound healing.

A disadvantage of these types of materials is that their biodegradable characteristic makes them susceptible to degradation under normal ambient conditions. There is usually sufficient moisture or humidity in the atmosphere to initiate their degradation even upon relatively brief exposure. This means that precautions must be taken throughout their processing and fabrication into useful forms, and in their storage and handling, to avoid moisture absorption. This is not a serious limitation as many materials require handling in controlled atmosphere chambers and sealed packaging; but it is essential that such precautions are observed. Middleton and Tipton (Middleton, J. and Tipton A. “Synthetic Biodegradable Polymers As Medical Devices” Medical Plastics and Biomaterials Magazine, March 1998) found that this characteristic also dictates that their sterilization before surgical use cannot be done using autoclaves, but alternative approaches must be employed (e.g. exposure to atmospheres of ethylene oxide or gamma radiation with cobalt 60).

While biodegradability is an essential material characteristic for the wound closure device, the intended application is such that a further requirement is that the material is formulated and manufactured with sufficient compositional and process control to provide a precisely predictable and reliable degree of biodegradability. The period of biodegradability corresponds to the healing interval for the trocar defect in the fascia layer, which is typically three to five months.

In these materials, simple chemical hydrolysis of the hydrolytically unstable backbone of the polymer is the prevailing mechanism for its degradation. As discussed in Middleton and Tipton (Middleton, J. and Tipton A referenced previously), this type of degradation when the rate at which water penetrates the material exceeds that at which the polymer is converted into water-soluble materials is known as bulk erosion.

Biodegradable polymers may be either natural or synthetic. In general, synthetic polymers offer more advantages than natural materials in that their compositions can be more readily finely-tuned to provide a wider range of properties and better lot-to-lot uniformity and, accordingly, offer more general reliability and predictability and are the preferred source.

Synthetic absorbable materials have been fabricated primarily from three polymers: polyglycolic acid (PGA), polylactic acid (PLA) and polydioxanone (PDS).

These are alpha polyesters or poly (alpha-hydroxy) acids. The dominant ones are PLA and PGA and have been studied for several decades. Gilding and Reed (Gilding, D. K and Reed A. M., “Biodegradable Polymers for Use in Surgery” Polymer 20, 1459-1464) discussed how each of these materials has distinctive, unique properties. One of the key advantages of these polymers is that they facilitate the growth of blood vessels and cells in the polymer matrix as it degrades, so that the polymer is slowly replaced by living tissue as the polymer degrades.

In recent years, researchers have found it desirable for obtaining specific desirable properties to prepare blends of these two dominant types, resulting in a highly useful form, or co-polymer, designated as PLGA or poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid). Asete and Sabilov (Asete, C. E. and Sabilov C. M., “Synthesis and Characterization of PLGA Nanoparticles”, Journal of Biomaterials Science—Polymer Edition 17 (3) 247-289 (2006)) discuss how this form is currently used in a host of FDA-approved therapeutic devices owing to its biodegradability and biocompatibility.

In one or more embodiments, the biodegradable wound closure device may be made of biodegradable material of different stability (i.e. half-life). While it is important for the material that is in direct contact with the fascia needs to stay in place for a few months, while the rest of the implantable structure can degrade significantly in a matter of weeks without affecting the performance of the payload. In one or more embodiments. 

We claim:
 1. An implantable tissue scaffold for wound closure comprising: a central rod; an upper plate angularly positioned on said central rod; and a lower plate angularly positioned on said central rod and spaced from said upper plate by a defect thickness dimension; said implantable tissue scaffold being a single unitary piece made of a biodegradable material.
 2. The implantable tissue scaffold of claim 1, wherein said upper plate and said lower plate are, at least in part essentially perpendicular to said central rod.
 3. The implantable tissue scaffold of claim 1, wherein said upper plate and said lower plate include fractional sections circumferentially positioned about said central rod.
 4. The implantable tissue scaffold of claim 1 wherein at least said lower plate cambers helically.
 5. The implantable tissue scaffold of claim 1, wherein said upper plate and said lower plate include a plate geometry which promotes tissue through growth.
 6. The implantable tissue scaffold of claim 5, wherein said plate geometry which promotes tissue through growth includes a plurality of perforations on each of said upper plate and said lower plate.
 7. The implantable tissue scaffold of claim 6, wherein said plurality of perforations include at least a band of perforations radially closer to said hub, and a band of perforations radially more distant from said hub.
 8. The implantable tissue scaffold of claim 1, further including an engagement feature proximate to said upper plate on an outer side of said upper plate.
 9. The implantable tissue scaffold of claim 1, wherein said engagement feature includes a plurality of grasping perforations on said upper plate and said lower plate.
 10. An implantable tissue scaffold for closure of endoscopic tissue defects, comprising: a tissue scaffold body scaled to a laparoscopic trocar port defect; said scaffold body including: a central rod; an upper plate angularly positioned circumferentially on said central rod, said upper plate having a helically cambering geometry; and a lower plate angularly positioned circumferentially on said central rod, said lower plate having a helically cambering and spaced from said upper plate by a defect thickness dimension; said implantable tissue scaffold being a single unitary piece made of a biodegradable material.
 11. The implantable tissue scaffold of claim 10, wherein said upper plate and said lower plate are, at least in part essentially perpendicular to said central rod.
 12. The implantable tissue scaffold of claim 10, wherein said upper plate and said lower plate each include at least three fractional sections circumferentially positioned about said central rod.
 13. The implantable tissue scaffold of claim 10, wherein said upper plate and said lower plate include a plate geometry which promotes tissue through growth.
 14. The implantable tissue scaffold of claim 13, wherein said plate geometry which promotes tissue through growth includes a plurality of perforations on each of said upper plate and said lower plate.
 15. The implantable tissue scaffold of claim 14, wherein said plurality of perforations include at least a band of perforations radially closer to said hub, and a band of perforations radially more distant from said hub.
 16. The implantable tissue scaffold of claim 10, further including an engagement feature proximate to said upper plate on an outer side of said upper plate.
 17. The implantable tissue scaffold of claim 10, wherein said biodegradable material has a predictable biodegradability and will biodegrade in three to five months after implanted into an animal laparoscopic port defect.
 18. An implantable tissue scaffold for closure of laparoscopic trocar port defects, comprising: a biodegradable tissue scaffold body scaled to an laparoscopic trocar port defects; said scaffold body including: a central rod; an upper plate angularly positioned circumferentially on said central rod, said upper plate having a helically chambering geometry and having a plurality of perforations on said upper plate; and a lower plate angularly positioned circumferentially on said central rod, said lower plate having a helically cambering geometry, said lower plate also having a plurality of perforations, said lower plate spaced from said upper plate by a defect thickness dimension; said implantable tissue scaffold being a single unitary piece.
 19. The implantable tissue scaffold of claim 18, wherein said upper plate and said lower plate are, at least in part essentially perpendicular to said central rod and include a number of fractional sections.
 20. The implantable tissue scaffold of claim 18 wherein said plurality of perforations include on each of said upper and said lower plate at least a band of perforations radially closer to said hub, and a band of perforations radially more distant from said hub.
 21. The implantable tissue scaffold of claim 18, further including an engagement feature configured to be grasped by a tissue scaffold insertion tool. 